If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Hi Unregistered,
We'll be undergoing major forum changes in the very near future. Be sure to check out the details here

I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

It does cause violence if you read some articles of a woman killed her baby because the baby disturbed her when she was playing games on Facebook. And another in my country his father asked the boy in his 20s to stop playing game (I forgot what is it) on his X-Box 360. The boy refused and when his father resorted to take away his console, he retrieved a kitchen knife and stabbed his father's liver.

As for me video games does cause agitation if people who disturb my enjoyment time. In more extreme such as killing. Nope to me as I can't even bring myself to do this.

So it is yes and no.

It evidently wasn't the game that caused these people to lash out - it's that they got angry about being disturbed from an activity. If that mother or boy had been doing something else and got interrupted, the reaction likely would have been the same. This was a problem with the people themselves, because apparently they were the types to get easily agitated and react violently. That's why it doesn't matter what they had been doing.

Just because video games were a part of the story does not in any mean way the video games were responsible for it happening.

Hmm. True it is dependent on who is playing the game. If the person got interested in it and became violent, do you think it is because of the person who has violent attitude got interested in it or the game that makes him interested makes him violent?

Really there are violence content in games such as FPS. I believe these kind of games make people crave for more realistic approach. Then again I did mention yes or no as my answer isn't it?

3DS FC: 2878 9875 2043, consists of Shuppet, Phantump and Dusclops. Another is 2981 9377 4651, and consists of Octillery, Poliwhirl and Gyarados.I have ALL WHITE 2 Entree Forest Pokemon! Pm me for offers. My trainer name is either Chestnut or Vandread.

They do have an effect. They desensitize children to violence. For example, if a kid plays too many violent video games, and they see someone get shot or beat to death, they won't be as sensitized to it as children who don't play games like that. Those things can really mess with developing minds.

This sums things up in a nutshell.
If anyone is desensitize to anything, then the results is a lack of empathy towards those in those particular situations, which as a result can offer a kid a reason and allows a kid to easily justify their actions in which may be going out to kill people.

This is purely a physiological debate and the tests and experiments in which may have involved experimenting with the psyches of people in which had contact with these games like these always varies and thus cant be conclusive. Because the test subjects were also all different somewhat and their mental stability were all different, but the "key" demographic of people who like to play these violent games are people who are more lickly to act out those actions in real life.
Some military organizations around the world including America have recently employed some training tactics with video games because of the very good hand eye coordination in which they induce. I don't not mean to glorify any actions of the those who massacre but in some of the cases were kids in theirs schools kid and were linked to violent video games, the kills they made were mainly all head shots...

But as Trainer michael said, it creates a desensitized child. As a result a child who has a lack sof empathy towards that situation and thus creates an opportunity for thoughts to be acted out.

This sums things up in a nutshell.
If anyone is desensitize to anything, then the results is a lack of empathy towards those in those particular situations, which as a result can offer a kid a reason and allows a kid to easily justify their actions in which may be going out to kill people.

The link that you've established between empathy and desensitization is not as distinct as you make it seem. Who's to say that desensitization doesn't simply just desensitize? (That is to say that it lessens the shock value that people get when watching these forms of media) To use myself as an example, I am desensitized to violent and sexual images due to my work in the field (and a bit of video gaming on the side), but that doesn't mean that I'm going to kill or rape someone just because I keep getting bombarded with the gruesome images, of course I still recognize the harmfulness and the moral incorrectness of doing such acts.

If you ask me, it has more to do with underlying human behaviours. And as I've stated, the Columbine shooting is a great example of that. Eric had pent up hatred which was well-documented in his journals, how come no one is shocked by tha? Because we always try to look for quick explanations by making assumptions through correlation and assume that it has valid causation, despite the fact that said correlation has the potential to be flawed.

Originally Posted by Celestial Moth

This is purely a physiological debate and the tests and experiments in which may have involved experimenting with the psyches of people in which had contact with these games like these always varies and thus cant be conclusive. Because the test subjects were also all different somewhat and their mental stability were all different, but the "key" demographic of people who like to play these violent games are people who are more lickly to act out those actions in real life.

Then if it always varies then I'd say it's fair to assume that video games should not harbour 100% of the blame with respect to criminal acts committed by criminal. Plus you can't say that because it's varied by person that a majority will act on these urges.

Penn and Teller tested the boy's desensitization by allowing him to fire a gun in a shooting range (after being an avid player of FPS games), the boy cried after firing the gun because he knew it was reality, it was no longer a bunch of pixels that he was shooting.

Originally Posted by Celestial Moth

Some military organizations around the world including America have recently employed some training tactics with video games because of the very good hand eye coordination in which they induce. I don't not mean to glorify any actions of the those who massacre but in some of the cases were kids in theirs schools kid and were linked to violent video games, the kills they made were mainly all head shots...

'Head Shot' is vague and insignificant, anyone with elementary school science background would know that if you eliminate the brain then you render the body dead and useless.

How come no one pays attention to the psychological/sociological/pathological profile of the video game player/murderer? It's a leap of logic when you can blame video games instead of looking up underlying behaviours.

Originally Posted by Celestial Moth

But as Trainer michael said, it creates a desensitized child. As a result a child who has a lack sof empathy towards that situation and thus creates an opportunity for thoughts to be acted out.

Social Scientists disagree with your statement.

Abstract:Psychological studies invariably find a positive relationship between violent video game play and aggression. However, these studies cannot account for either aggressive effects of alternative activities video game playing substitutes for or the possible selection of relatively violent people into playing violent video games. That is, they lack external validity. We investigate the relationship between the prevalence of violent video games and violent crimes. Our results are consistent with two opposing effects. First, they support the behavioral effects as in the psychological studies. Second, they suggest a larger voluntary incapacitation effect in which playing either violent or non-violent games decrease crimes. Overall, violent video games lead to decreases in violent crime.

Abstract:
Psychological studies find that video game play is associated with markers for violent and antisocial attitudes. It is plausible that these markers indicate either whetted or sated preferences for antisocial behavior. I investigate whether a proxy for video gaming is associated with the prevalence of various crimes and find evidence that gaming is associated with significant declines in crime and death rates. These results are robust to various alternative specifications. Other youth-related leisure activities—sports and movie viewing—generate smaller or no effects. These results cast doubt on the desirability of proposed restrictions on video game marketing. (JEL L86, D18, I18)

Objective Video game violence has become a highly politicized issue for scientists and the general public. There is continuing concern that playing violent video games may increase the risk of aggression in players. Less often discussed is the possibility that playing violent video games may promote certain positive developments, particularly related to visuospatial cognition. The objective of the current article was to conduct a meta-analytic review of studies that examine the impact of violent video games on both aggressive behavior and visuospatial cognition in order to understand the full impact of such games. Methods A detailed literature search was used to identify peer-reviewed articles addressing violent video game effects. Effect sizes r (a common measure of effect size based on the correlational coefficient) were calculated for all included studies. Effect sizes were adjusted for observed publication bias. Results Results indicated that publication bias was a problem for studies of both aggressive behavior and visuospatial cognition. Once corrected for publication bias, studies of video game violence provided no support for the hypothesis that violent video game playing is associated with higher aggression. However playing violent video games remained related to higher visuospatial cognition (r x = 0.36). Conclusions Results from the current analysis did not support the conclusion that violent video game playing leads to aggressive behavior. However, violent video game playing was associated with higher visuospatial cognition. It may be advisable to reframe the violent video game debate in reference to potential costs and benefits of this medium.

I want someone to tell me, just how video games make children into violent, rabid killing machines with computer level calculation and coldness, when fourty years ago the cool thing to do was get a pop gun pistol (A real, physical object that you hold in your hands) and play cowboys 'n indians where children actually practiced taking aim, pulling triggers, and killing each other, right after watching the new episode of Bonanza or the Lone Rider.

You wanna know what really F***K'ed up that generation of children? Getting drafted into god-dang Vietnam and shooting children in the head while they ran towards them with grenades; all while the government sprays Agent Orange or whatever "rainbow pesticide" they felt like that day all over them, and then saying "Ooops, sorry, that war was actually not really needed, and we didn't know military grade chemicals sprayed for 12 acres around your squad would have any health repercussions. You'll be fine. Now drop your drug habit and come home so you can re-integrate with our bullcrap society where your 24 year old manager at McDonalds tells you to sweep the floor or your fired when you used to shoot men in the crotch just for looking in your general direction."

I think it is just another pathetic go-to excuse to excuse terrible parenting that has no real proven evidence or support, and therefore is just one of those ideas you let them look like an idiot and run their mouth about till they get it out of their systems.

Seriously there is no correlation. If anything I would say it would be a good release for anger and make your child calmer.

The problem is usually the parents. Now idk if video games cause violent behaviors or not but a lot of parents will just buy a video game without even looking at the box. Take this as an example. In my opinion, they use it as a form of babysitting. I'm sure if a parent watched their child play Gears of War 3 online for a good minute, they wouldn't consider buying the sequel. And if they do allow it, then it is purely their fault for allowing their child to play one of the most violent video games ever. (For those of you that don't know about it, you have a machine gun with a chainsaw on it and a sawed-off shotgun that makes people explode). Now does that make the child act out in violence? Well, that's where I bring this up (watch the sequels, they're funny). Clearly he's violent. But is he violent because the game is well, sort of violent? Or is it because he was being betrayed? This is a very interesting topic and I'm interested in what everyone has to say.

Wow, I've seen quite a few arguments on both sides that seem very skewed or extreme. I think there are some things we should keep in mind in regards to this topic:

1. There is evidence supporting both sides of the argument. Some studies have suggested a positive correlation between video game-playing and violence; others showed no correlation.
2. Yes, it's wrong to assume that video games make people violent because a few crazy gamers became violent. But it's also wrong to assume that video games do not lead to violence based on a few peaceful people who play violent video games. It's the same kind of generalization.

That having been said, my own opinion on the matter is uncertain, but I'm leaning slightly to the side of some sort of correlation. No, I'm not saying that violent video games will make children fantasize about killing people. I don't even quite agree with the empathy issue Trainer Michael brought up. My opinion here centres around the issue of early interest. A person's childhood experiences can have an effect on their behaviours as an adult, though the effect is often indirect. Chances are the person won't precisely mimic the events of such experiences. Rather, it's like a seed being planted in the child's mind. One of several that interact in very complex ways to develop one's personality later on. It's basic psychology.

In the case of violence in video games, it might influence a somewhat carefree attitude toward aggression later on, but other factors--morals the person has adopted, other things they liked to do as a child, other interests, etc--could obscure that. Another factor that could obscure this influence is the video game itself, specifically the attitude it takes toward violence and how and why it's used. If a game lets people shoot innocents without punishment, for instance, the influence could be stronger. Same goes for a game where you play as a criminal, and the criminal acts are emphasized much more heavily than the protagonist's heroic efforts, if any (I'm looking at you, Grand Theft Auto). On the other hand, more light-hearted games where the violence is comical (the Super Mario games, for instance) have the violence be less believable and (sometimes) less emphasized--these games would have less of an influence. Especially if the violence is used only against the bad guys--that is, those who attack you.

But like I said before, these influences will not always lead to a violent person. It depends on the rest of their personality as well, as well as moral influences--which in this case would usually condemn the use of violence. Still, they can have an influence.

This next part is slightly off-topic, but still related. The same concept above can apply to other things present in many mature-rated games, such as sexual content and swearing. Unlike the violence example, it's not as widely understood and communicated that such things are bad. People who hear a lot of swearing early in life are quite likely to adopt swearing into their own language later on, for example.

It can even apply to more positive or not-necessarily bad things. A person who plays a lot of the more cute and comical video games, and/or watches a lot of cartoons, might adopt a more whimsical nature later on in life. (I'm certainly guilty of this. My interest in swords was influenced by video games long ago as well.)

Overall, I believe violence in video games can lead to violent attitudes in people, but mostly if the people were exposed to them as children, and also if there were other negative influences on the person's life as well. And also that people who are into the really violent video games could easily weaken their compatibility with people who don't like them at all. The latter is just a little something to beware of for those CoD fans out there...

Just because people play video games doesn't mean they will go out killing people. If anything, it's probably a mental illness that made him/her want to go out killing people. But of course, the media completely overlooks that part. They notice a criminal, then notice he/she plays GTA/COD/Halo/etc and try to put 2 and 2 together to make 69, and then assume that the games made them violent.

That is like if I go to a city with lots of gay people, and then have them watch MLP, would that mean MLP made them gay? No, it just means they were gay people who just happened to watch MLP. If anything, video games let you vent your anger out onto the virtual characters on your screen. Maybe you had a crappy day at school/work and want to take it out on someone, but you don't have anyone to take it out on or you don't want to, so you play COD/Halo/GTA/etc and then take it out on whoever your shooting in game, especially if it's GTA where you can freeroam.

very true but it stimulates the violent part of the brain... and they are making games so realistic now.
for kids that maybe have a small mental illness it can be a challenge to draw the line.
and something else if you see death and gore all over the place (in games) what would you do if you saw it in real life, feel at home?!
i rest my case

Ok I don't see the big deal here. We are getting more and more protective of our poor eyes and ears when it comes to violence and profanity. Throughout history it was considered a public event to watch things like beheading, hangings, tarring, etc. And by golly did people also consider those to be family events too!! Violence wasn't just a sport during the Roman Coliseum days either.